posted July 27, 2006 07:01 PM
Here is the rebuttal specific to the article posted by pid. http://www.answering-christianity.com/refute_silas_terrorism.htm
Rebuttal to Silas's "Muhammad, Islam and Terrorism" article:
The following was sent to me by brother Calis Finest; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.
Visitors to the web site www.mostmerciful.com who have read my earlier response to Answering-Islam's article TEXTUAL VARIANTS OF THE QUR'AN under the URL http://www.mostmerciful.com/reply-ans-islam.htm and my other response at URL http://www.mostmerciful.com/deception.htm would be familiar with the practices of presenting prejudiced statements and also quoting of excerpts that are incomplete by the contributors to the "Answering-Islam" web site. Praise Be To Allah, the Truth finally manifests...
This major anti-Islamic web site http://answering-islam.org/ has recently opened a new section titled "Understanding Islamic Terrorism" under URL http://answering-islam.de/Silas/terrorism.htm. I have faithfully copied the following texts from their article "Muhammad, Islam, and Terrorism".
------------------- Silas - the author of this article, writes ----------------------
MUHAMMAD, ISLAM, AND TERRORISM
INTRODUCTION
The actions of Islamic terrorist groups operating throughout the world are well known. Islamic terrorists have bombed and destroyed buildings, planes, and vehicles. Additionally, during the last 20 years, Muslim terrorists have targeted and murdered tens of thousands of males, females, adults, and children. All over the world, in Kenya, Algeria, Indonesia, Egypt, Iran, France, South America and America, etc., Muslim terrorists have attacked and murdered those they felt were a threat to their aims. No one has been spared by these treacherous people.
Not surprisingly, examination of the websites that deal with terrorism show that about one half of all terrorist groups in the world are Islamic in nature.
Why are these groups Islamic? What does the religion of Islam have to do with terrorism? Is there a link between the two? How do these groups justify murdering civilians based upon Islamic values? Are terrorism and murder actually allowed under Islam?
This article examines the basis for Islamic terrorism found within Islam. Starting with Muhammad and reviewing his teachings and his actions, and then visiting what other Muslims have taught, the fundamentals of Islamic terrorism will be examined.
NOTES
1) My comments or source references will be in [ ] type brackets. Other writers comments will be in the ( ) type brackets.
2) When I talk about terrorist actions, I am talking about motive and action. Crime exists in every society, and I am not including all crimes as examples of terrorism. I am focusing on the violent actions Muslims carry out in the name of Islam. For example, in Egypt some years ago, a Muslim man murdered an American women. He killed her then robbed her. His motive was greed, not the furtherance of Islam. I would not call that an Islamic terrorist action. On the other hand, Muslims who carry out bombings, like the ones in Kenya and Tanzania - in which hundreds of innocents died, do so because they feel they are attacking their enemies and have Allah's sanction to do so. That is a terrorist action.
Additionally, there are many kinds of terrorists who engage in violence. There are political terrorists operating in South America, there are terrorists who murder doctors who perform abortion. There are Communist terrorists, capitalist terrorists, right wing terrorists, left wing terrorists, etc. In America, there are gangs that operate like terrorists. However, in this writing, I am focusing on terrorism based upon what Muhammad taught and did. I am focusing on Muslims, who for the sake of Islam, commit violent acts of terrorism. But I want all readers to know that I note that there are many non-Muslim terrorists operating in the world. Some of these other terrorists are every bit as vicious as Muslim terrorists.
3) A "terrorist" is defined as "one who engages in acts of terrorism". "Terrorism" is defined as "the unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."
------------------------- end of the Introduction -------------------------------
My Response to the above:
Within the above Introduction one can easily notice that the phrases "Islamic terrorist" and "Muslim terrorists" are repeated over again by the author. While describing the various other kinds of "terrorists", the author writes:
"Additionally, there are many kinds of terrorists who engage in violence. There are political terrorists operating in South America, there are terrorists who murder doctors who perform abortion. There are Communist terrorists, capitalist terrorists, right wing terrorists, left wing terrorists, etc. In America, there are gangs that operate like terrorists."
Surprisingly, there is NO mention of the phrase "Christian terrorists" or of "Jewish terrorists". Does that mean they do not exist or have never existed in the history of mankind?? One may be inclined to ask Silas - the author; Do not the "terrorists who murder doctors who perform abortion" have a religion? Are they atheists? The fact is that these "murderers of doctors" justify the killing of their enemies based upon the sacred sanction that comes to them from their Bible. I do acknowledge with thanks the fact that Silas (a Born again Christian or a Judeo-Christian !), has identified these murders as the "terrorist". However, he did shy away from identifying these terrorists as the "Bible thumping Christian terrorists" or the "Fanatic Christian anti abortionists".
The next logical question to the author would be; Have you not heard of the killings of innocent residents of the City of London, England by the bombs that are planted by the members of the Irish Republican Army (IRA)? Who are they? The population of Ireland is 93% Roman Catholic and 3% Anglican Christians. Their deadly opponents - the Ulster Defense Forces (UDF), also take their sanctions to kill the members of IRA, from the Holy Bible. Are these not the fanatic "Catholic terrorists" and the fanatic "Protestant terrorists"?
The author has also ignored the historical fact, while dealing with the affairs of world terrorism, that thousands of Serbian Muslim men, women and children were systematically "killed, tortured and sexually abused" with great pride and cynical pleasure, by the Croatian army in the name of "ethnic cleansing". Who were these Croatians? Here is the breakdown of population for Croatia: 76.5% Catholics and 11.1% Orthodox Christians. I hope the author is fully aware of a similar "ethnic cleansing" that is now in progress in Montenegro?
Let us not forget the days of apartheid in South Africa. The "Whites" who terrorized and ruled the "non Whites" with extreme atrocities belonged to the famous Dutch Reformed Church? They were the "White Christian terrorists".
The author mentions the "political terrorists operating in South America" but ignores the fact as to who brought Christianity to this New Continent and how! Who were these Spaniards that "claimed" much of Mexico, Central America, the West Indies and South America in the sixteenth century with their mighty Swords, if not the Bible preaching Christians sent by their Christian Kings? They first plundered these territories and then forcibly converted the uneducated poor population to seek solace from the Cross of Jesus Christ. No Catholic can ever be proud of their celibate Canadian Priests who used to satisfy their sexual urges by raping the boys of aboriginal tribes that were sent by their parents under the care of these missionaries to learn Christian values.
I am also surprised that the author of this article as well as the Christian Webmaster of the site (who has written a pre introductory passage and the concluding remarks) forgot the Christian Crusades that killed not only thousands of Muslims but also the Jews who refused to give up their faith and become Christians. These "Crusades" are identified within the encyclopedias as the "Christian Holy Wars" or "Christian Military Expeditions". The first of the total Eight Crusades was inaugurated by the Roman Catholic Pope Urban II at the Council of Clemont and vigorously preached by Peter the Hermit.
YES, President George W. Bush - a born again Christian, also forgot this unforgettable historical acts by his fellow Christians, when he identified his Government's Goal to end the "world terrorism" as American Crusade. Later on, he changed this nomenclature when informed that this term a is synonym for the act of "Greatest terrorism in the name of God and Religion".
The forthcoming generations of Jews will not likely forget the destruction of their European Jewry by the Nazis or the Holocaust. But let me remind these generations of Jews that the perpetrators of these acts and their Supreme Leader - Hitler, were all practising Christians. There was not a single Muslim or an Arab that was involved in this act of "Supreme terrorism" in Europe.
Prior to the establishment of the Jewish state of Israel in 1948, the "Zionist terrorists gangs" massacred British men, women and children in Palestine. Upon this massacre is established the Jewish homeland. The present day Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon who is often called the Butcher of Sabra and Shatilla, may soon be tried before the World Court as the War Criminal. He was directly responsible for the shooting of nearly 3000 to 3500 unarmed Palestinian men, women and children and Lebanese refugees. This "Master terrorist" was made to retire as the Defense Minister of Israel in 1983 for this terrorist act. Earlier he had also massacred the civilian Bedouins of the Sinai. What is happening today in the occupied Palestine, under the direct orders of this Prime Minister is a "State terrorism". Dear readers, believe me this is the economical suffocation and slow pace holocaust for millions of Palestinians.
Any one who has read the world famous Hindu Epic Tale of "Ramayana" composed by Valmiki Muni would tell you that Rama was a character of this epic tale. When was this epic story composed? Valmiki Muni or Guru Valmiki (the author of Ramayana) is referred to in the Hindu Purana called "Taittiriya Brahmana" which is dated as c4600 B.C. This mythological story of Rama evolves around that period. Rama was NOT a historical figure. The "Hindu terrorists" who totally demolished the famous Babri Masjid (Mosque) and the associated complex in Ayodhya, India on December 6, 1992, would tell you that they have determined the exact location of Rama's birth. And, that happens to be the site were upon this Mosque was built centuries ago. On the day of pre-planned demolition, one group of "karsevaks" - the "Hindu terrorists" blocked all entry points into Ayodhya to keep out central security forces, while another began to loot and burn Muslim homes. To read further details please visit http://www.geocities.com/indianfascism/Babri/babri_masjid.htm. Thanks.
My appeal to Silas:
After reading the above historical facts, I hope you would realise how biased is your rendering and remove the following paragraph from your article: "Not surprisingly, examination of the websites that deal with terrorism show that about one half of all terrorist groups in the world are Islamic in nature."
-------------------------- the further text by Silas begins ----------------------
MUHAMMAD'S EARLY ACTIONS AND TEACHINGS
When Muhammad started out preaching his religion of Islam he was
not violent. He was persecuted for preaching his religious ideas - Islam - and denigrating the pagan religions of the Meccans. Some of Muhammad's followers were tortured. Things were so bad for him and his few followers that he sent many of them to Abyssinia [Ethiopia] for refuge. Eventually, he and
his followers moved north to a city called Yathrib [Medina], where some members of two Arab tribes wanted Muhammad to be their prophet.
BEGINNING OF MUHAMMAD'S VIOLENCE
Just prior to Muhammad's leaving for Medina, he received a "revelation" allowing him to fight the Meccans. He knew that in Medina, he had a group of armed men who would support him. Furthermore, in Medina, would be more distant from the Meccans and their attempts to oppress or
kill him. The following is from "The Life of Muhammad", page 212, by A. Guillaume, which is a rendering of Ibn Ishaq's "Sirat Rasulallah", a
biography of Muhammad written by an early Muslim scholar [1].
BEGINNING OF QUOTE
"THE APOSTLE RECEIVES THE ORDER TO FIGHT
The apostle had not been given permission to fight or allowed to shed blood before the second Aqaba [a place where a pledge was made between Muhammad and his followers from Medina]. He had simply been ordered to call men to God and to endure insult and forgive the ignorant. The Quraysh [a leading group of Meccans] had persecuted his followers, seducing some from their religion and exiling others from their country. They had to choose whether to give up their religion, be maltreated at home, or to flee the country, some to Abyssinia, others to Medina.
When Quraysh became insolent towards God and rejected His gracious purpose, accused His prophet of lying, and ill treated and exiled those who served Him and proclaimed His unity, believed in His prophet and held fast to His religion, He gave permission to His apostle to fight and to protect himself against those who wronged them and treated them badly......[a]
The meaning is "I have allowed them to fight only because they have been unjustly treated while their sole offense against men has been that they worship God. When they are in the ascendant they will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity, i.e., the prophet and his companions all of them." The God sent down to him: "Fight them so that there be no more seduction," i.e. until no believer is seduced from his religion. "And the religion is God's,", i.e. Until God alone is worshipped."
END OF QUOTE
[Note: two passages from the Quran are referenced: [a] Sura 22:39-41, which I did not quote, and [b] Sura 2:193]
Two critical points here:
1) in Mecca, where Muhammad was weak, he attacked no one. He only preached his religion and insulted the Meccan's religions. But it was just prior to his leaving for Medina, where he had a limited amount of armed men to support him, that he received this "revelation" and began to use violence to further his desires. Islamic history shows that as Muslims grew in power their
forms of violence changed from criminal terrorism to outright warfare.
2) At the end of the quote, it says that Muslims are to fight those that do not worship Allah.
I also comment on Ibn Ishaq's work. When reading this passage from Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad is made to appear to be long suffering and primarily fighting in self defense, and that up until just before Muhammad's departure, the Meccan persecution was tolerable, but that it became so bad that Muhammad was finally given permission to fight back.
The problem with this is that Muhammad had been severely persecuted prior to this and that Muslims had been abused well before their departure. In other words, the quoted passage is apologetic work on Ibn Ishaq's part. Earlier, well before the Treaty of Aqaba, things were so bad for Muhammad that he went to a town called Taif to seek their help and protection [Guillaume, op cit, page 192]. The Taifians rejected and abused him. Things were so bad for Muhammad in Mecca, Muhammad had to beg three men for their protection [Guillaume, op cit, page 194].
In Mecca, Muhammad continued to proclaim himself as a prophet and he was abused all the more. He never received any "revelations" to fight at that time.
Eventually, good fortune fell into Muhammad's lap and just as in Adolph Hitler's case, his persistence paid off. A group of feuding Arabs in Medina accepted him as their prophet. They hoped he could help them maintain peace. They eventually made a pledge to support Muhammad in war against the Quraysh [Guillaume, op cit, page 205]. Now Muhammad knew he had an able and armed following. It was only when he had a following that could defend themselves, and his people were migrating north to Medina, and that he knew he was going to leave town, that suddenly "Allah" gave Muhammad his "revelation" to fight. Muhammad's circumstances changed, and Muhammad's Allah changed with them. Muhammad went from being only a "warner" to being an aggressor.
------------------------ end of the text by Silas ----------------------[/b]
MY RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE...
Silas: I am facing a slight difficulty. Is this your first name or the last name or just a pseudo name to hide your true identity? How do I address you? Normally I would not respond to an anonymous author but since your article has been placed on "Answering-Islam" and other Christian web sites, I had to respond.
SKIPPING OF A QUOTED TEXT:
If a reader was to open and start reading from page 112 of A. Guillaume's translation of Muhammad ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, one would notice that Silas has skipped an important portion of the quoted text. At the end of the Quoted Text, Silas writes, which again is a partial Truth and not the Truth:
[Note: two passages from the Quran are referenced: [a] Sura 22:39-41, which I did not quote, and Sura 2:193]
Silas has omitted ibn Ishaq's recorded notes about the order that the Apostle had received from Allah to fight (which happens to be the subject of Silas article) as well as the Verses of the Qur'an which ibn Ishaq had quoted. Below is the omitted text to be found on page 112 and 113. Words within { } are mine.
"The first verse which was sent down on this subject from what I {ibn Ishaq} have heard from 'Urwa b. al-Zubayr and other learned persons was: 'Permission is given to those who fight because they have been wronged. God is well able to help them, --those who have been driven out of their houses without right only because they said God is our Lord. Had not God used some men to keep back others, cloisters and churches and oratories and mosques wherein the name of God is constantly mentioned would have been destroyed. Assuredly God will help those who help Him. God is Almighty. Those who if we make them strong in the land will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity. To God belongs the end of matters.' " Sura 22. 39-41
(Note: Guillaume writes them to be Sura 22. 40-42 in his notes).
Dear Readers: Within the omitted portion is the evident answer to what is happening today. Muslims are being oppressed by the unjust occupiers of their land with the direct assist and support of the super powers. To say that the Muslims are being justly dealt with and have NOT BEEN WRONGED or to say that the Muslims are NOT DRIVEN OUT OF THEIR HOUSES WITHOUT RIGHT would be far far away from the REALITY and TRUTH.
My response so far has conclusively proved what I had started to establish.
The rending of this Christian author is basically PREJUDICED and PARTIAL (quoting excerpts that are not complete), to hide the TRUTH. Qur'an Reveals:
"Nay We hurl the Truth against falsehood and it knocks out its brain and behold falsehood doth perish! Ah! woe be to you for the (false) things ye ascribe (to Us)." Sura 21: 18
A Deception !
After a summary of the revealed verse, author Guillaume writes on page 113:
"Then God sent down to him: 'Fight them so that there is no more seduction," 2 {foot note number 2, reads (Sura 2. 198)}
Author Silas replaces the opening word of the above paragraph and quotes:
"The God sent down to him: "Fight them so that there be no more seduction," [b] {footnote [b] reads [Sura 2. 193]}.
Under the normal circumstances I would consider this to be a "typo" error. But, from my past experiences with other presentations on this web site, I have reasons to believe that the change of "Then" to "The" is a "deception". Silas wants the earlier quoted text of Sura 22: 39-41 to be "disassociated" with the revealed text to follow. Silas writes in his notes that he has not quoted the text of Sura 2: 193. I have reproduced below the text of the "non quoted verse":
Note: Ibn Ishaq mentions the verse number to be 2. 198 since he may be referring to an Arabic musaf. In Yusuf Ali's translation the number is 2. 193.
"And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression."
Translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (from CD 'Alim')
After the reading of the "entire verse", as it has been revealed to Prophet Muhammad for the mankind, there is a significant difference between the quoted summary and the Revealed Text. That's reason for the non quoting.
Omission
Silas has quoted texts from Guillaume's book under the sub-heading of:
THE APOSTLE RECEIVES THE ORDER TO FIGHT. But has deliberately omitted the last paragraph. Upon reading of this final passage one can visualize the ULTIMATE TRUTH. Although Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), had received "the order to fight" the Prophet DID NOT FIGHT and instead migrated to Medina. The ensuing sub-heading in Guillaume's book reads: THOSE WHO MIGRATED TO MEDINA. Here is the omitted text:
"When God had given permission to fight and this clan of the Ansar had pledged their support to him in Islam and to help him and his followers, and the Muslims who had taken refuge with them, the apostle commanded his companions, the emigrants of his people and those Muslims who were with him in Mecca, to emigrate to Medina and to link up with their brethren the Ansar. 'God will make for you brethren and houses in which you may be safe.' So they went out in companies, and the apostle stayed in Mecca waiting for his Lord's permission to leave Mecca and migrate to Medina." 'The Life of Muhammad' page 213.
It is an absolute shame and disgrace upon Silas, who after having known and studied the above TRUTH, to write the following FALSEHOOD in his article:
Muhammad was every bit as brutal as the Nazis.
If Muhammad were alive today, we'd call him a Serb or a Nazi!
Prophet Muhammad is not alive today upon this earth, but the PATH that he had shown to mankind -- the ISLAM, is not only alive and ever vibrant but it
is the fastest growing religion on the face of this world. And, the reason for it is; Islam is based upon the "REVEALED TRUTH" and not upon the teachings of "THE LIAR". To know the identity of this Liar, the Founder of the Pauline Christianity practiced today by the majority of Christians, please read my article; THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS AND THE THREE PERSONALITIES
1. The Teacher of Righteousness. 2. The Wicked Priest. 3. The Liar
Here is the URL http://www.mostmerciful.com/scrolls.htm Please also read the article; EXAMINING THE SELF CONTRADICTORY TESTIMONIES BY PAUL The URL for it is http://www.mostmerciful.com/paul.htm.
[b]-------------------------- the further text by Silas -------------------------------
MUHAMMAD'S EARLY TERRORIST ACTS
After moving to Medina, Muhammad began to have conflict with the Jews and pagans in the area. I'll focus on several incidents, not necessarily in chronological order, that illustrate Muhammad as a terrorist.
The first terrorist incident involves Muhammad's command to his followers to "kill any Jew that comes under your power".
From Guillaume, op cit, page 369:
"The apostle said, "Kill any Jew that falls into your power." Thereupon Muhayyisa b. Masud leapt upon Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish merchant with whom they had social and business relations, and killed him. Huwayyisa was not a Muslim at the time though he was the elder brother. When
Muhayyisa killed him Huwayyisa began to beat him, saying, 'You enemy of God, did you kill him when much of the fat on your belly comes from his wealth?' Muhayyisa answered, 'Had the one who ordered me to kill him ordered me to kill you I would have cut your head off.'"
END OF QUOTE
This story is also supported in the Sunan of Abu Dawud, Book 19, Number 2996:
Narrated Muhayyisah: The Apostle of Allah said: If you gain a victory over the men of Jews, kill them. So Muhayyisah jumped over Shubaybah, a man of the Jewish merchants. He had close relations with them. He then killed him. At that time Huwayyisah (brother of Muhayyisah) had not embraced Islam. He was older than Muhayyisah. When he killed him, Huwayyisah beat him and
said: O enemy of Allah, I swear by Allah, you have a good deal of fat in your belly from his property.
END OF QUOTE
This murder was committed upon Muhammad's command. Note that this Muslim murderer would have killed a family member at the drop of a hat. Muhammad was no better than a bigoted criminal boss, ordering his men to wantonly murder Jewish people. Hitler did this. And, this is what Serbs are doing to the Kosovan Muslims. Muhammad's command to murder Jews puts him in the same category as Milosovic, Hitler, and others who have persecuted Jews throughout history.
A quote from an Islamic scholar - Wensinck writes in his, "Muhammad and the Jews of Medina" [2], page 113:
"It is remarkable that tradition attributes Muhammad's most cruel acts to divine order, namely the siege of Qaynuqa, the murder of Kab, and he attack upon Qurayzah. Allah's conscience seems to be more elastic than that of his creatures."..... Ibn Ishaq and al-Waqidi report that the prophet said the morning after the murder (of Kab Ashraf), "Kill any Jew you can lay your
hands on.".
This incident is also documented in Tabari's History [3], page 97 of volume 7.
This shows that Muhammad had unsuspecting people, those who even had good relations with Muslims, murdered in cold blood because they were Jewish. There was no justification to murder these Jews other than they were not Muhammad's followers. These actions were the work of Muhammad's terrorists committing murder.
--------------------- the end of this further text by Silas -----------------
My response to the above...
Silas has quoted several incidents from Guillaume's book 'The Life Of Muhammad' to illustrate that Muhammad was indeed a terrorist. Above is the first incident that he has presented before his readers with the deceitful commentaries, insinuations and innuendoes. If one can prove from the above narrated first incident, without shadow of any doubt, that Silas has in reality stooped down to the lowest level in his criticism and has now opted for visible DECEPTION AND DECEIT that would qualify him as THE LIAR, then the rest of his presentation has lost its credibility and not worth depending upon.
Before I prove to you that Silas has LIED AND WHY, let me quote the text that Silas has chopped off from the paragraph quoted above, from page 369.
Here is the text quoted by Silas:
"The apostle said, "Kill any Jew that falls into your power." Thereupon Muhayyisa b. Masud leapt upon Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish merchant with whom they had social and business relations, and killed him. Huwayyisa was not a Muslim at the time though he was the elder brother. When Muhayyisa killed him Huwayyisa began to beat him, saying, 'You enemy of God, did you kill him when much of the fat on your belly comes from his wealth?' Muhayyisa answered, 'Had the one who ordered me to kill him ordered me to kill you I would have cut your head off.'"
After quoting half of the paragraph Silas writes "END OF QUOTE". Below is the non quoted portion of this paragraph, written by Guillaume on page 369.
"He said that this was the beginning of Huwayyisa's acceptance of Islam. The other replied, 'By God, if Muhammad had ordered you to kill me would you have killed me?' He said, 'Yes, by God, had he ordered me to cut off your head I would have done so.' He exclaimed, 'By God, a religion which can bring you to this marvellous!' and he became a Muslim."
If one was to believe that the above mentioned killing did happen because of the order of Prophet Muhammad and that command was completely unjust and absolutely unwarranted for (as Silas wants us to believe), then could the person who had questioned the killer would have accepted Muhammed as the "Messenger of God" and become a Muslim? Please continue reading further and soon THE TRUTH will manifest before you and THE LIE will vanish.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND...
Silas writes in the opening of this segment: "After moving to Medina, Muhammad began to have conflict with the Jews and pagans in the area."
Silas has not given the historical background behind these conflicts. We shall soon learn that the behaviors of the Jews was the root cause of the conflicts.
Silas writes: "I'll focus on several incidents, not necessarily in chronological order, that illustrate Muhammad as a terrorist."
The question is; Why not in the chronology of the occurring of the events?
In the ensuing paragraphs Silas writes: "The first terrorist incident involves Muhammad's command to his followers to "kill any Jew that comes under your power". From Guillaume, op cit, page 369:
"The apostle said, "Kill any Jew that falls into your power." Thereupon Muhayyisa b. Masud leapt upon Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish merchant with whom they had social and business relations, and killed him."
The killing of Ibn Sunayna, which is recorded on page 369 was not the first incident of the conflict between the Jews and Arabs. Earlier, on page 364
the author Guillaume has recorded "The killing of Ka'b b. al-Ashraf".
On page 366 Guillaume has also given the reasons for this killing of a Jew by the Arabs. It had to do with the sensuous and immoral character of Ka'b. On the same page, Guillaume has also quoted the amatory verses that Ka'b had composed about Ummu'l-Fadl d. al-Harith. I have reproduced below the opening sensuous verses, composed by Ka'b (a Jew) for an Arab woman:
Are you off without stopping in the valley
And leaving Ummu'l Fadl in Mecca?
Out would come what she bought from the pedlar of bottles,
Henna and hair dye,
What lies 'twixt ankle and elbow is in motion 2
When she tries to stand and does not.
The footnote 2 by Guillaume reads: Presumably her buttocks are meant; they would be between her ankle and her elbow as she reclined. Large and heavy buttocks were marks of female beauty among the old Arabs.
(Can anyone think Silas has missed reading all these things???)
JEWS USED TO RIDICULE AND TEASE MUSLIM WOMEN...
Below is the text from 'THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD' by Muhammad Husayn Haykal, translated by Ismail Ragi A. al Faruqi. It gives us the true picture of what was happening in Madina between the non-Muslims (Jews, associationist, Pagans, Hypocrites) and Muslims, after the victory of the Battle of Badr. The text below answers ALL the killings that happened in the history of Madina:
"The murder of Ka'b increased the fears of the Jews to the point that not one of them felt secure. Nonetheless, they continued to attack Muhammad and the Muslims and incite the people to war. A desert woman came one day to the Jews' market in the quarter of Banu Qaynuqa seeking to remodel some jewelry at one of their shops. They persistently asked her to remove her veil, but the woman refused. Passing behind her without her knowledge, one of them tacked he robe with a pin to the wall. When the woman got up to leave, the robe was pulled down and her nakedness exposed. The Jews laughed and the woman cried. Seeing what happened a Muslim passerby jumped upon the shopkeeper and killed him on the spot. The Jews gathered around the Muslim and likewise killed him. The Muslim's relatives called for help against the Jews and a general fight between them and the Banu Qaynuqa erupted. Muhammad first asked the Jews to stop their attacks and keep the covenant of mutual peace and security or suffer the kind of treatment meted out to the Quraysh. They ridiculed his request saying: 'O Muhammad! Fall not under the illusion that you are invincible. The people with whom you have fought were inexperienced. By God, if you were to turn your arm against us, you will find us adept in the art of war.' After this, little option was left to the Muslims but to fight the Jews. Otherwise, Islam would suffer political deterioration, and the Muslims would become the ridicule of Quraysh when they had just succeeded in making the Quraysh the ridicule of Arabia." pages 244 / 245.
Silas may have been cherishing this notion within his heart that by hiding the TRUE facts of the conflict, he would be able to make his Muslim readers fall in his trap of LIES and they would imagine "Muhammad was a terrorist", but his plan has back fired and no Muslim or Christian would now trust what is written on the web site "Answering-Islam" about Muhammad, Islam and terrorism.
*** (Text below was added on October 22, 2001) ***
The sub-heading given by Silas to this passage under my rebuttal, reads:
MUHAMMAD'S EARLY TERRORIST ACTS
Let me cudgel the memory of Silas. He has probably forgotten the following noteworthy passage from the Gospel according to Matthew. I have given the under mentioned "Declaration of Truth" by Christ Jesus, a befitting title:
JEWS: THE KILLERS, CRUCFIERS AND PERSECUTORS OF THE PROPHETS
(KJV) Matt. 23:27-39 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead {men's} bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchers of the righteous, and say, if we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. {Ye} serpents, {ye} generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and {some} of them ye shall kill and crucify; and {some} of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute {them} from city to city. That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, {thou} that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under {her} wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed {is} he that cometh in the name of the Lord."
Can Silas or Web master of 'Answering-Islam' deny any part of the above???
THE EARLY TERRORIST ACTS OF JEWS
A Jew may turn around and say; Jesus was not a Messiah. He was a false prophet. Whatever he may have declared is of no consequence to me.
Well, here is the text from the Fifth Book of Moses called Deuteronomy:
(KJV) Deut. 7:2-5 "When the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jesuits, seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, {and} utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son. For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the Lord be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly. But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire."
CHALLENGE
Here is my challenge to Silas. Go ahead and find a Command from Allah within the Revealed verses of the Glorious Qur'an that would be equivalent or correspond with what is told to do with the families of the enemies and their animals, in the Bible. Here is the recorded Command from the Old Testament:
(K.J.V.) 1 Samuel 15: 3 "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."
Silas: Would you please explain the logic behind the killing of enemies domesticated animals such as ox, sheep, camel and ass. Do animals sin?
Silas writes and I quote: "Muhammad's command to murder Jews puts him in the same category as Milosovic, Hitler, and others who have persecuted Jews throughout history."
For your information, Milosovic - the one who is being prosecuted before the International Courts in Hague as a War Criminal for the killing of "Muslims", did the "ethnic cleansing" with the blessings of the Orthodox Eastern Christian Church which has been closely associated with eastern European nationalism.
In case you have overlooked the "Noteworthy Quotations" by non-Muslim leaders and writers for the Prophet of Islam, please visit the following URL:
http://www.mostmerciful.com/published-quotes.htm
One may ask; Why would a disciple (student) of the Bible and Jesus, paint the picture of "Muhammad and Islam" with a biased black brush and mention not a single sentence concerning the atrocities that have been committed in the past and are being committed day in and day out by Jews and/or the Israeli Government against their neighbors, whose land they have illegally occupied.
O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of
them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust. Qur'an 5: 51
Let me also point out that many Christian scholars and Churchgoers may not agree with what is written by Silas. One Christian web surfer from USA having been upset by this article has asked Silas to place a LINK within his article to my rebuttal so that the surfers have the true picture of Islam. I have personally requested the Web master of 'Answering-Islam' to create a link on his site.
Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say: "We are Christians:" because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world and they are not arrogant. And when they listen to the revelation received by the Apostle thou wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears for they recognize the truth: they pray: "Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses. "What cause can we have not to believe in Allah and the truth which has come to us seeing that we long for our Lord to admit us to the company of the righteous?" And for this their prayer hath Allah rewarded them with gardens with rivers flowing underneath their eternal home. Such is the recompense of those who do good. But those who reject faith and belie our Signs they shall be companions of hell-fire.
Qur'an 5: 82-86.
A TEXT THAT SILAS WOULD NOT LIKE US TO READ...
Silas has repeatedly quoted passages after passages from Guillaume's Book 'THE LIFE OF MUHAMMAD' . Below is one of the several passages from the same book that Silas would not like his readers to read. Please read it and see for yourself how it concurs with the Quranic revelation, quoted above.
A DEPUTATION OF CHRISTIANS ACCEPT ISLAM
While the apostle was in Mecca some twenty Christians came to him from Abyssinia when they heard news of him. They found him in the mosque and sat and talked with him, asking him questions, while some Qurayshites were in their meeting round the Ka'ba. When they had asked all the questions they wished the apostle invited them to come to God and read the Quran to them. When they heard the Quran their eyes flowed with tears, and they accepted God's call, believed in him, and declared his truth. They recognized in him the things which had been said of him in their scriptures. 'The Life of Muhammad' page 179
*** (Text below was added on October 28, 2001) ***
Silas or his associate may turn around and refute the above quotation by arguing that the group of Christians that came from Abyssinia were not aware of the acts of "terrorism" by Muhammad, because they had neither lived in Hijaz, Arabia; nor could be cognizant of the events to take place in Medina.
Well, here is a recorded straight forward answer from the Guillaume's book.
JEWISH "DOCTORS OF THE LAW" ACCEPT ISLAM IN MADINA...
Note: No Jewish Rabbi living in Madina would have ever spoken so profoundly and with such a reverence about the Prophet of Islam, which has been recorded by Ibn Ishaq in his Sira and reproduced below, if Muhammad had indeed unjustly murdered the Jews of their city, simply because "they were Jews", as Silas has falsely contended. The texts quoted below are from pages 240/241.
" ‘ABDULLAH B. SALAM ACCEPTS ISLAM
I was told the story of ‘Abdullah b. Salam, a learned rabbi, by one of his family. He said : ‘When I heard about the apostle I knew by his description, name, and the time at which he appeared that he was the one we were waiting for, and I rejoiced greatly thereat, though I kept silent about it until the apostle came to Medina. When he stayed in Quba among the B. ‘Amr b. ‘Auf a man came with the news while I was working at the top of a palm-tree and my aunt Khalida d. al-Harith was sitting below. When I heard the news I cried Allah Akbar and my aunt said, "Good gracious, if you had heard that Moses b. ‘Imran had come you could not have made more fuss!" "Indeed, aunt," I said, "he is the brother of Moses and follows his religion, being sent with the same mission." She asked, "Is he really the prophet who we have been told will be sent at this very time?" and she accepted my assurance that he was. Straightway I went to the apostle and became a Muslim, and when I returned to my house I ordered my family to do the same.
‘I concealed the matter from the Jews, and then went to the apostle and said, "The Jews are a nation of liars and I wish you would take me into one of your houses and hide me from them. Then ask them about me so that they may tell you the position I hold among them before they know that I have become a Muslim. For if they know it beforehand they will utter slanderous lies against me." The prophet housed me; the Jews came; and the apostle asked them about my standing among them. They said: "He is our chief, and the son of our chief; our rabbi, and our learned man." When they said this I emerged and said: "O Jews, fear God and accept what He has sent you. For by God you know that he is the apostle of God. You will find him described in your Torah and even named. I testify that he is the apostle of God, I believe in him, I hold him to be true, and I acknowledge him." They accused me of lying and reviled me. Then I reminded the apostle that I had said that they would do this, for they were a treacherous, lying, and evil people. I publicly proclaimed my conversion and my household and my aunt Khalida followed suit."
Note: While speaking to Jews, Jesus spoke: "If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But if you do not believe what he wrote, how will you believe what I say?" (John 5: 46-47). The question is; how many Jews who believed in Moses did accept Jesus as a Prophet like Moses?
The history has repeated itself. The coming of Muhammad in the villages of Arabia ("in the villages that Kedar inhabits"), leading "the blind (the pagans) by a path they have not known" (Islam), "turning the darkness before them into light" (from the age of ignorance to the age of enlightenment), giving them "a new song to sing in praise of the God, from the end of the earth" (the recitation of the Koran from all over the world) and finally "utterly putting to shame those who trust in carved images" (destroying of the idols of Kab'ah), is all written in the Book of Isaiah chapter 42. Even the Prophet's victory over Mekkah in "Mount Paran" with an army of his "10,000 Holy ones", which did happen on 11 January, 630 CE, had also been recorded in the fifth book of Moses called Deuteronomy. (chapter 33, verse 2). Jews and Christians both read these "divinely inspired" writings within their Holy Bible. If Silas and the webmaster of "Answering-Islam" were the true believers of their own Scripture, they would have long accepted Muhammad as the "Messenger of God" and entered the faith chosen by God Himself. "Verily never will Allah change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves." (Qur'an 13: 11) Below is another story of a Rabbi of Medina accepting Islam.
"THE STORY OF MUKHAYRIQ
He was a learned rabbi owning much property in date palms. He recognized the apostle by his description and his own learning, and he felt a predilection for his religion(1) until on the day of Uhud, which fell on the sabbath, he reminded the Jews that they were bound to help Muhammad. They objected that it was the sabbath. ‘May you have no sabbath,’(2) he answered, and took his weapons and joined the apostle in Uhud. His parting testimony to his people was: ‘If I am killed today my property is to go to Muhammad to use as God shows him.' He was killed in the battle that followed. I am told that the apostle used to say ‘Mukhayriq is the best of the Jews.’ The apostle took over his property and all the alms he distributed in Medina came from it." 'The Life Of Muhammad'
(1) Presumably 'Muhammad's religion'; the pronoun is ambiguous.
(2) Or, perhaps, 'You have no sabbath'.
Insha'Allah, in the next addition we will examine the verses from the Qur'an. Please visit again. Thanks...
Note: I am waiting to see a response from Silas to my above rebuttals. I am also awaiting to see the creation of the Link on his web site, to my rebuttal.
Akbarally Meherally
October 28, 2001
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
posted July 27, 2006 12:09 AM
posted July 27, 2006 04:30 PM
posted July 27, 2006 09:11 PM
common sense and logic. ...